Meta descriptions better empty or with duplicate content?
-
I am working with a yahoo store. Somehow all of the meta description fields were filled in with random content from throughout the store.
For example, a black cabinet knob product page might have in its description field the specifications for a drawer slide. I don't know how this happened. We have had a programmer auto populate certain fields to get them ready for product feeds, etc. It's possible they screwed something up during that, this was a long time ago.
My question. Regardless of how it happened. Is it better for me to have them wipe these fields entirely clean? Or, is it better for me to have them populate the fields with a duplicate of our text from the body.
The site has about 6,500 pages so I have and will make custom descriptions for the more important pages after this process, but the workload to do them all is too much. So, nothing or duplicate content for the pages that likely won't receive personal attention?
-
Thanks, you were a big help. I'll do the A/B you are talking about.
I am thinking at this point I'll probably go with the body text. The site I'm talking about has well written text as the body of most pages. And, as I said, I'll be writing custom descriptions for the most important pages.
-
To be more specific, if you have good body text, Google/Bing can pull that into the SERPs if there is no meta description. That shortens your efforts. What I'm saying is, A/B test a page with Fetch or some other headless browser tool to see what the SERP is like without Meta description. I'm sure you've seen cruddy SERP results with Alt-text or code or unpronouncable characters: that's a coding issue. In many cases the result will be the H1 text, or the first sentence of the body.
As for what Luke said, yes, if bots aren't pulling good text into that space, a dynamic programmatically generated meta can work. It depends on goals. The downsides are that it can lose you a click if the searcher doesn't like what they see, as in, if the CTA or hook is ineffective. With body text they might give you the benefit of the doubt.
-
Thanks for the response.
I understand what you are saying. It sounds to me like you think (as Luke does below) that if duplicating the body text (which is good quality) will work then that's the best way to go?
What about Luke's suggestion of using dynamic text? Do you think dynamic text could be better than quality body text? I've never worked with any dynamic text. Are what are the downsides?
I'll investigate the questions you posed as well.
-
Thanks, we are thinking along the same lines here. The text from our body will 95% of the time be of good quality for a description, so it might work just fine.
I didn't think about creating dynamic text. Good idea. This might be the best middle ground for all the pages I don't plan to give personal attention.
Looks like I have a couple options to consider.
-
I think this depends a lot on what the text of the body looks like. If in general, the first couple of lines of the body is a good introduction that would inspire someone to click on the search result, then that would be a fine way to go. Otherwise you may want to trust Google. They do a pretty good job of selecting some relevant text for you.
If all of these are product pages, another option may be to dynamically create a generic yet enticing first sentence that the name of the product could be inserted in to and follow it with the first line from the body. So something like "Our <insert product="" name="">is the greatest thing since sliced bread. <insert custom="" text="" from="" the="" body="" to="" fill="" rest="">". So you would yield results like "Our door slide is the greatest thing since sliced bread...." and "Our black cabinet knob is the greatest thing since sliced bread....".</insert></insert>
Note my choice of initial phrase was more for comic relief. I would especially avoid that if the store also sells sliced bread
-
Whew, that is a tough one. IMHO, you are better off with a useful Meta description--one that is accurate to what the SITE is about--than none, IF there's a risk that bots will pull something other than useful text (like the social button or image alt text). Just think how the SERPs would look if only Title is visible, or a mess.
But, better with none, and let the bots pull in their own, than an inaccurate one (what you have now).
Have you talked to a dev about a dynamic and programmatic way to make unique meta descriptions for these 6500 pages? What kind of result do you get if you delete the meta description? Can you use a testing tool to fetch the site without meta description, just to see what searchers will see? If it's not bad and is more useful than a sitewide duplicate, just blank the majority out,
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
Meta keywords
should every site have meta keywords or is this not used anymore? I don't use yoast and prefer rank math but there is nowhere to insert it. when I look at moz bar it shows meta keywords as a field so maybe it is important...
On-Page Optimization | | Mosaj0 -
No meta description on category page
Hi Moz is reporting no meta description on a wordpress category page like this one: http://www.dwliverpoolphotography.co.uk/category/uncategorized/ Can I add a meta description to a category? Best wishes. David.
On-Page Optimization | | WallerD0 -
Duplicate content because of member only restrictions on a forum.
Our website's Community Forum links to the membership profile pages, which by default are blocked for non-members. https://www.foodbloggerpro.com/community/ https://www.foodbloggerpro.com/community/member/1301/ We're getting warnings in Moz for duplicate content (and errors) on these member profile pages. Any ideas for how we can creatively solve this problem? Should we redirect those pages or just beef them up with more content? Just ignore it and assume that search spiders will be smart enough to figure it out? See attached video for further explanation. Community_Area.mp4
On-Page Optimization | | Bjork0 -
Photo Gallery with Duplicate Content and Titles
I have a photo Gallery that is coming up as a lot of Duplicate Titles and Page Content and fixing each photo just isn't possible right now. Should I just block the search engines from indexing them to resolve the errors?
On-Page Optimization | | NeilBelliveau0 -
How to: Meta description for home page
My latest crawl diagnostic is telling me that my homepage is missing a meta description. I am using wordpress and thesis. How do I add a meta description to my main page? ex www.mynewsite.com Mahalo!
On-Page Optimization | | dealblogger0 -
Duplicate content issue
Hello, I got duplicate content issue on my home page : examplesite.com
On-Page Optimization | | digitalkiddie
examplesite.com/index.html Those page urls are with duplicate content. If in index.html i use 301 redirect like that : Header( "HTTP/1.1 301 Moved Permanently" );
Header( "Location: http://examplesite.com" );
?> would i loose any page authority ? sorry for the newbie question0 -
Copyscape Duplicate Content Ownership Question
We have a site that has had its content copied verbatim to numerous other sites and articles. We were advised to change our content but the content is originally ours. Does google take that into account before they apply duplicate penalties? And shouldn't copyscape be able to show this information in their reports? It just doesnt seem right that the originating author would have to change content because everyone else is stealing it. Any clarification on this?
On-Page Optimization | | anthonytjm0 -
Does Google still see masked domains as duplicate content?
Older reads state the domain forwarding or masking will create duplicate content but Google has evolved quite a bit and I'm wondering if that is still the case? Not suggesting that a 301 is not the proper way to redirect something but my question is: Does Google still see masked domains as duplicate content? Is there any viable use for domain masking other than for affiliates?
On-Page Optimization | | TracyWeb0